Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad
That was my reaction on hearing the home secretary on the BBC Today programme this morning talking about 42-day pre-charge detention.
First she says that in the light of the massive defeat by the Lords the government will take the measure out of the Counter-Terrorism bill.
But then, refusing to admit that the measure is dead, she says they are going to prepare a special bill just to bring in 42-day detention if something happens to convince people that it is needed.
Then, disgracefully and even more ridiculously, she accused the opposition parties of playing politics with national security.
The interviewer quite rightly asked Ms Smith if she was seriously suggesting that people like former spy Chief Dame Eliza Manningham Buller who opposed the bill, former Chief Constable Lord Dear who moved the amendment, the current DPP, and former Labour Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, and former Labour Attorney General Lord Goldsmith were all opposing 42 days for political advantage.
The Home Secretary had to admit that she wasn't suggesting that.
She was then asked if she accepted that when all these people who knew something about terrorism were opposed to 42 day detention because they thought it was the wrong thing to do, was it not possible that the opposition parties also really believed that it was the wrong thing to do.
Jaqui Smith had no answer to that and changed the subject, alleging that there had been a lack of willingness from the opposition to discuss how to implement the proposals workable.
The interviewer pointed out that if you think something is fundamentally wrong there is no point discussing how to implement it.
She had no answer to that one either and repeated her previous point.
Overall it was one of the worst performances I have ever heard from a holder of one of the great offices of state.
Shadow Security Minister, Pauline Neville-Jones, had made these comments on the House of Lords vote.
"The vote was decisive. The proposal to extend pre-charge detention failed on three significant grounds: necessity, desirability and practicability. On all sides of the House of Lords the majority view - drawing on significant experience in policing, security and the law - was that these provisions should be completely removed. The Government produced no evidence to support an extension to 42 days. The extension would have been disproportionate and, in any event, so unworkable that the police and prosecutors would not have used it."
First she says that in the light of the massive defeat by the Lords the government will take the measure out of the Counter-Terrorism bill.
But then, refusing to admit that the measure is dead, she says they are going to prepare a special bill just to bring in 42-day detention if something happens to convince people that it is needed.
Then, disgracefully and even more ridiculously, she accused the opposition parties of playing politics with national security.
The interviewer quite rightly asked Ms Smith if she was seriously suggesting that people like former spy Chief Dame Eliza Manningham Buller who opposed the bill, former Chief Constable Lord Dear who moved the amendment, the current DPP, and former Labour Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, and former Labour Attorney General Lord Goldsmith were all opposing 42 days for political advantage.
The Home Secretary had to admit that she wasn't suggesting that.
She was then asked if she accepted that when all these people who knew something about terrorism were opposed to 42 day detention because they thought it was the wrong thing to do, was it not possible that the opposition parties also really believed that it was the wrong thing to do.
Jaqui Smith had no answer to that and changed the subject, alleging that there had been a lack of willingness from the opposition to discuss how to implement the proposals workable.
The interviewer pointed out that if you think something is fundamentally wrong there is no point discussing how to implement it.
She had no answer to that one either and repeated her previous point.
Overall it was one of the worst performances I have ever heard from a holder of one of the great offices of state.
Shadow Security Minister, Pauline Neville-Jones, had made these comments on the House of Lords vote.
"The vote was decisive. The proposal to extend pre-charge detention failed on three significant grounds: necessity, desirability and practicability. On all sides of the House of Lords the majority view - drawing on significant experience in policing, security and the law - was that these provisions should be completely removed. The Government produced no evidence to support an extension to 42 days. The extension would have been disproportionate and, in any event, so unworkable that the police and prosecutors would not have used it."
Comments
Despite which, I do think she had an unmakeable case to argue - but then, anyone with principles would have resigned rather than need to make such a pathetic attempt.
The sooner she joins the rest of the Cabinet's rejects, the better.